How Cyril dodged Phala Phala bullet
JOHANNESBURG - A combination of factors led to President Cyril Ramaphosa being cleared of wrongdoing in the Phala Phala saga, including the failure by former State Security Agency boss Arthur Fraser to provide evidence and disclose his source of information for allegations of the theft of US$580 000 in cash from the farm
In her provincial report, which was sent to concerned parties for their response on Friday, acting Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka cleared Ramaphosa of any breach of law in the housebreaking and theft of foreign currency at his privately owned Phala Phala farm in Waterberg, Limpopo, in February 2020. The report was sent to African Transformation Movement President Vuyo Zungula, DA leader John Steenhuisen and farm employees Ellias Muller and
Simphiwe Ndlovu.
Speaking to City Press, Zungula confirmed receipt of the report, but said he and his party had been advised not to comment on it.
He said they were studying the report and would respond to the public protector within ten days, as requested. If this provisional report is unchanged, it will mark the second time Ramaphosa dodges the bullet – the first time was after the National Assembly voted not to uphold a Section 89 inquiry report that found he had a case to answer to in relation to this matter.
The public protector does not investigate criminal matters that fall within the jurisdiction of the Hawks, such as burglary. Ramaphosa was also cleared because the public protector found that he was not involved in the daily running of the farm. According to the evidence before Gcaleka, the day-to-day operations of Phala Phala Wildlife are managed by its General Manager, Hendrik von Wielligh, with the assistance of approximately 40 employees.
Following the investigation and inspection of the president’s register of financial interests, the public protector also established that Ramaphosa retained a financial interest (member’s interest) in Ntaba Nyoni Estates, the private company that owns his Phala Phala farm, as described in the executive ethics code. ‘‘Therefore, the evidence before the public protector does not support the allegation that the president’s financial interests in game and cattle farming at Phala Phala farm exposes him to any situation involving the risk of a conflict between his official responsibilities and his private interests,’’ stated the public protector.